How do judicial reviews in the dissent differ from those in the majority opinion? a) the arguments of the dissent are reviewed and summarized b) in the dissent, the majority opinion itself is used as evidence c) notes taken by the attorneys are used to support the dissent's argument. d) the dissent depends on previous, similar cases for support.

The difference is that in dissent, the majority opinion is used as evidence, as shown in option B.

We can arrive at this answer because:

Dissent is a term that refers to permission to disagree with an official legal position, especially when it comes to a collective decision.In this case, the dissent is formed by a group of people who disagree with the decisions taken by a majority.In a court of law, a majority decision occurs when more than half of the jurors issue a position. Dissent is a separate opinion that disagreed with the majority.

When there are cases of dissent, the majority decision is used as evidence, while the majority decision does not consider dissent as evidence under any circumstances.

More information:

link

Ithink the answer is c